The Elitist Fly Fisherman....Reality or Myth?

OK now i am starting to sink into trolling. Im out for a while. feel free to discuss TAP and bash it, and everything it stands for.

🙂
 
Here is my opinion on trout fishing.

1. No stream that is stocked should be C&R only.
2. Less streams should be stocked.
C. Special regs are for "special" people.

those signs all over the place really suck.
 
Personally, when I see someone spin fishing a FFO section I get really pissed. I'm contemplating vehicle destruction and drowning them! No seriously...I explain to them that it's against the law and why the stream is regulated. I also suggest stockes streams and panther martins with an orange tail... deadly. I'm an all tackle guy. I prefer using a spinning rod when bass fishing. I fly fish when hunting trout. I have friends that think they are the cats *** and that fly fishing is the only way to go. I have no problem fishing a stream that is an ATW that gets stocked over a wild population and seeing a spin fisherman exercising his privilage. My elitist blood boils when I see too many fish being kept or culled, litter, or a law being broken.
 
My elitist blood boils when I see too many fish being kept or culled, litter, or a law being broken.

I don't think that is elitist blood that is a true fishermans blood that would boil at these things.
 
For the record, I was mostly joking although those 3 positions I stated are indeed my opinion. Third one was a stretch, but honestly I usually avoid them.

Midgeman, littering is a hot button for me, too.
 
It is a major concern to this group that we are losing some of the best trout waters in this State to: Fly-Fishing Projects, Delayed Harvest Fly Fishing Only, No Harvest Fly-Fishing Only, Catch and Release, Delayed Harvest Artificial Lures Only, Trophy Trout Projects, and Limestone Springs Wild Trout Waters.
Click to expand...

Mike,

On more topics than not, I can sympathize with TAP's positions. Not always agree, but certainly sympathize. There is one notable exception. On the above, the C&R and TT entries.

Both are commonly all-tackle regs that do not exclude bait fishermen. They are generally used on heavily pressured wild trout streams where regular creel limits would clearly degrade the fishery. It seems to me, that with TAP's stated goals, they should support all-tackle versions of these regulations. Their opposition has always led me to question the true objectives.
 
I would question how effective C&R is with live bait, also. Maybe that's just my ignorance, but I could probably count on one hand the trout I've deep-hooked as a fly fisherman over the past 15 yrs. When I was more into bait fishing though, I used to deep hook all the time. I lost a lot more fish in those days. Again, that could have been the fisherman as opposed to the actual method of fishing.
 
1. No stream that is stocked should be C&R only.
2. Less streams should be stocked.
C. Special regs are for "special" people.
Click to expand...

FD,

1. See your point, but disagree. There are lots of streams, even stocked ones, that get so much pressure that allowing regular harvest would mean it's a viable fishery for about a week after any stocking. The goal is to extend the fishing opportunities in popular waters. These streams are quite often delayed harvest, which makes sense for me, as it eventually does allow the harvest before the fish die of summertime temps.

2. Agree

3. Somewhat agree. Often, they use them where they're not necessary, because for the sake of fairness they think every area has to have a few close by. And when they are not needed, the fishing isn't necessarily better inside than it is out. "Special" people fail to realize this and think that's the only place to fish. But there are other situations, mostly larger, wild streams, where they are indeed needed to protect the fishery. I would agree to the extent that special regs should be more need based and less "spread em around evenly" based.

 
pcray1231 wrote:

Mike,

On more topics than not, I can sympathize with TAP's positions. Not always agree, but certainly sympathize. There is one notable exception. On the above, the C&R and TT entries.

Both are commonly all-tackle regs that do not exclude bait fishermen. They are generally used on heavily pressured wild trout streams where regular creel limits would clearly degrade the fishery. It seems to me, that with TAP's stated goals, they should support all-tackle versions of these regulations. Their opposition has always led me to question the true objectives.
Click to expand...

that sums it up for me, too.

I'm not a fan of tackle restrictions in most cases, but Mike, the website definitely paints a picture of a bunch of guys who's only goal is to bring home a limit each time they fish.

What can I say, it just gives me that impression. Maybe if I lived in that area, I'd feel differently.
 
I would question how effective C&R is with live bait, also. Maybe that's just my ignorance, but I could probably count on one hand the trout I've deep-hooked as a fly fisherman over the past 15 yrs. When I was more into bait fishing though, I used to deep hook all the time.
Click to expand...

I bait fished for many years, and would have to say that by the end of that time, my deep hooking rate was comparable, or even perhaps a bit better, than it is with the fly rod. Meaning, with bait, you had to screw up to have it happen. It rarely happens with a fly rod, but occasionally with trico's or midges they'll suck it right down.

A fish will take bait deep if you let him. But we were taught early to keep a tight line and strike as soon as the fish hit. I get angry if I see a guy "letting him take it". They'll even say "I'm getting a bite" as they stare at the dang rod tip. For God sakes man, set the hook!

We also rarely used worms. I think worms tend to lead to more deep hooking than working strung minnows, dead drifting salmon eggs on a tight line, and the like.
 
Yeah. See, C&R wasn't instilled in me until I started fly fishing. We used to keep everything and eat it (legally of course). That was just how we rolled. We also rarely fished wild streams and stuff. Fly fishing is what opened us up to C&R, wild trout fishing, etc.
 
pcray1231 wrote:
1. No stream that is stocked should be C&R only.
2. Less streams should be stocked.
C. Special regs are for "special" people.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

First let me say that it is OK that we disagree.

1. See your point, but disagree. There are lots of streams, even stocked ones, that get so much pressure that allowing regular harvest would mean it's a viable fishery for about a week after any stocking.
Click to expand...
A lot of people believe that even where it is not true.

The goal is to extend the fishing opportunities in popular waters. These streams are quite often delayed harvest, which makes sense for me, as it eventually does allow the harvest before the fish die of summertime temps.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that in most cases those waters are popular because they have special regs. Don't need it. Reduce the number of streams stocked to only marginal waters and there will be plenty to stock. Maybe I should have reversed the order.
2. Agree

3. Somewhat agree. Often, they use them where they're not necessary, because for the sake of fairness they think every area has to have a few close by. And when they are not needed, the fishing isn't necessarily better inside than it is out. "Special" people fail to realize this and think that's the only place to fish. But there are other situations, mostly larger, wild streams, where they are indeed needed to protect the fishery. I would agree to the extent that special regs should be more need based and less "spread em around evenly" based.
Click to expand...

I think we are closer to total agreement on this one than you realize.

I was just trying to keep it short.

Many times they are just marketing tools, and like you said, many anglers only fish the special places.

I'm also in the process of rethinking this one. Since we both agree that many anglers think the only place to fly fish are special places, reducing the number of special places will do what to the ones that truly are special? you know what I mean.
 
I did plenty of wild trout fishing before picking up a fly rod. Now, it was mostly on little brookie waters. In that area, big water meant stockies, and we enjoyed that too. But there were no "big" wild trout streams like Spring, Penns, or the LJR.

We kept almost nothing. We weren't opposed to it. But we had the outlook that we didn't want to hurt the brookie populations, and it was more hassle than it was worth on the larger streams just for some pale stockie meat. There were a few deep woods camping excursions, over healthy brookie populations, where we intentionally kept a couple for the pan, and I don't regret it. The test was whether it was likely that fish would ever be caught by anybody else. If the answer was no, and the population in the stream wasn't strained, then it was ok. I still feel that way today.

On the larger streams, when my brother and I were young and still learning, meaning still deep hooking a few fish, those that took it deep and were likely to die met the stringer. To deep hook a fish was met with the same deep gut regret as injuring, but not killing an animal while hunting. But releasing a dying fish was even more unethical. So stringering that fish was almost a punishment for deep hooking him, it was unpleasant but had to be done. And you had to eat it.
 
Do flyfishers go on pabaitfish.com and paspinfish.com and make accusations?

I don't know the answer; I'm just asking. ;-)
 
Well I just tried!

Pat, most of my bait fishing was warm water species, so the idea of catching 7" brookies was of no interest. Would have rather been catchin' bass!
 
Also, channel catties. That was always fun fishing. Out on my uncle's boat at 1am, chummin the waters, catching big catties, good times!
 
I've still never kept a bass in my life. And I went through some periods where we targeted them a lot. In my high school years I did a lot of big river fishing too, though it was mostly to get away from parents and there may have been 6 packs and girls involved. 🙂 But we did actually fish!

I do remember it being a little strange when we got a boat and would fish Lake Erie for walleye. If it was legal, it went into the cooler, no exceptions. That's as close as I've ever been to a "meat hunter" in fresh water. Saltwater fishing was similar, whether it was croaker and spot on the surf or going offshore for tuna, mahi mahi, and the like. We were out not only for fun, but also to fill the freezer. Somehow the ethics of it were different. Much of it probably stemmed from my mom. If it was the right species, she wanted us to bring fresh seafood. We were no longer recreating, but providing.
 
DUH!!! What was the ORIGINAL topic? I can't remember with all the other riff raff now being placed here. Just answer the original question and get on will ya!!
 
T.A.P. i would say 95 percent of our active or key members are catch and release guys. What the main conscern are the special regulation areas. The hot button is the fact of fishing for instance, yellow creek.

There is a section that has a wire across the stream for the FLy Fishing Only Section. They do not like the idea that if I am fishing with them, I can go across and they cant. (I do know that that section of stream was saved because of the dedication of fisherman to keep it open and the main conscern was litter, and I applaud that effort) but i think what gets T.A.P. is that the stream is still stocked from funds derived from the sales of licenes and such that is mostly coming from bait fisherman.

I will add this, I do not agree with every thing stated in the club. Just as many do not agree with all of the "laws" of their religion. They share most of my views so I go on.

Furthermore, I did not bring T.A.P. into this thread.
 
So, would they or would they not support a regulation that is all-tackle C&R in such a place?

The part I can't get past is that special regulation = no bait fishing. As a guy who's done a lot of fishing in central PA, that's just not my experience. LJR and Spring are all-tackle special regs, except for a small area. Much of the more popular area of Penns is all-tackle trophy trout, and may soon become all-tackle slot limit. All of the brook trout enhancement projects are all tackle.

Lots of special regs allow bait fishing. I'd agree that more should be placed in AT regs. And I'd fully understand if you lobbied for say, places like Yellow Creek to become AT C&R rather than FFO C&R. I'd agree more often than not, and even when I don't, I'd respect your organization and it's views. But the all-out opposition to any sort of special regulation confounds me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages
Wayward Trading”/> </center> </div> </div> </div> <div class=


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top